4 ms·

Here's an excellently produced video showing just how ambitious the design is: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/index.cfm?id=1090 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/in

Here's an excellently produced video showing just how ambitious the design is: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/index.cfm?id=1090 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/index.cfm?id=1090

Goronmon 14y ago
I was nearly in shock as to how complicated the landing sequence was going to be and then...sky crane. That is one amazingly ambitious project.
karpathy 14y ago
This sounded more like some movie maker pitching a scene for a sci-fi movie. Except they are actually serious.
zheng 14y ago
So that is basically insane, but I do have to ask how many of those kinds of maneuvers have been tried before? I mean, they say they can't land the rover with rockets, so I assume they have used alternate methods before as well?
- Pyrodogg 14y ago
  The smaller rovers "bounced down" with airbags. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Exploration_Rover#Airbags http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Exploration_Rover#Airbags
- pohl 14y ago
  For comparison, here is the similar video that they put out to describe the EDL system used by Spirit & Opportunity back in 2004. For some reason it was a mere 6 minutes of terror. I'm not sure what accounts for the discrepancy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij33yhdGn_g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij33yhdGn_g
  - rory096 14y ago
    Phoenix was also 7 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2ucH1PT4LQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2ucH1PT4LQ Maybe the retrorockets/sky crane in Phoenix/Curiosity (respectively) add a few seconds.
    - jasonwatkinspdx 14y ago
      Thanks guys. It was neat to see what parts of the design (and the video) were reused from prior projects.
    - pohl 14y ago
      Here's a pretty good presentation on the design constraints of Curiosity. He answers the 6 vs 7 question about 27 minutes in: it's the guided-descent phase that gives the extra minute. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q38AncYm2U http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q38AncYm2U

Here's an excellently produced video showing just how ambitious the design is: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/index.cfm?id=1090 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/index.cfm?id=1090

Goronmon 14y ago

I was nearly in shock as to how complicated the landing sequence was going to be and then...sky crane. That is one amazingly ambitious project.

karpathy 14y ago

This sounded more like some movie maker pitching a scene for a sci-fi movie. Except they are actually serious.

zheng 14y ago

So that is basically insane, but I do have to ask how many of those kinds of maneuvers have been tried before? I mean, they say they can't land the rover with rockets, so I assume they have used alternate methods before as well?

Pyrodogg 14y ago
The smaller rovers "bounced down" with airbags. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Exploration_Rover#Airbags http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Exploration_Rover#Airbags
pohl 14y ago
For comparison, here is the similar video that they put out to describe the EDL system used by Spirit & Opportunity back in 2004. For some reason it was a mere 6 minutes of terror. I'm not sure what accounts for the discrepancy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij33yhdGn_g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij33yhdGn_g
- rory096 14y ago
  Phoenix was also 7 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2ucH1PT4LQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2ucH1PT4LQ Maybe the retrorockets/sky crane in Phoenix/Curiosity (respectively) add a few seconds.
  - jasonwatkinspdx 14y ago
    Thanks guys. It was neat to see what parts of the design (and the video) were reused from prior projects.
  - pohl 14y ago
    Here's a pretty good presentation on the design constraints of Curiosity. He answers the 6 vs 7 question about 27 minutes in: it's the guided-descent phase that gives the extra minute. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q38AncYm2U http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q38AncYm2U